Murkowski opposes DOJ election lawsuit, and Bernie Sanders agrees

By SUZANNE DOWNING

Oct. 25, 2026 – Sen. Lisa Murkowski is objecting to the Justice Department’s lawsuit over Alaska’s two-Sullivan Senate race, saying state officials have already done enough to distinguish the candidates.

“Alaskans don’t need any help voting for their preferred candidates, and the State of Alaska has already handled this by clearly distinguishing the candidates on this year’s ballot. The Department of Justice should never have filed this lawsuit,” Murkowski wrote. Murkowski has endorsed incumbent Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan.

Her statement comes as federal attorneys allege that the candidacy of Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired Petersburg teacher, could confuse voters intending to support the senator, and that it appears to be designed solely to confuse.

As The Alaska Story previously reported, the Oct. 22 lawsuit seeks a conditional delay in certification: If the incumbent loses and votes for the other Sullivan could have changed the outcome, the department wants an investigation into whether those votes reflected confusion. Filing the lawsuit would not itself stop certification without a court order.

The complaint alleges deliberate voter deception. The judge, Sharon Gleason, must determine whether the federal government has a valid legal basis for the relief it seeks.

Murkowski’s confidence that ballot distinctions settle the matter invites a look back at her own unusual reelection in 2010, when interpreting voter intent became central to Alaska’s Senate election.

Murkowski lost the Aug. 24 Republican primary to Joe Miller, who had support from Sarah Palin and the Tea Party movement. After conceding the primary, Murkowski launched a write-in campaign in September. Her name would not appear among the printed general-election choices; supporters had to mark the write-in oval and supply her name. She passed out wristbands across the state with her name spelled correctly.

That decision produced a laborious counting process. It was a mess.Election workers reviewed handwritten ballots, campaign observers challenged individual votes, and Division of Elections Director Gail Fenumiai evaluated disputed entries. Minor spelling variations were accepted when officials could determine that the voter intended to support Murkowski.

Miller argued that the statute required stricter compliance. The Alaska Supreme Court rejected that interpretation, holding that misspellings, abbreviations and minor variations did not invalidate a write-in vote when the voter’s intention could be determined. Murkowski herself intervened in the litigation and challenged categories of ballots the division had excluded.

The final count credited Murkowski with 101,091 votes, including 8,160 challenged ballots that officials counted for her. Miller received 90,839 votes on the printed candidate line. Murkowski’s unchallenged write-in total alone exceeded that figure.

Her victory was certified Dec. 30 after the legal challenges failed. Miller conceded the following day.

The parallel has limits but Murkowski’s own election illustrates how consequential questions about names, ballot markings and voter intent can become.

Meanwhile, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has joined the dispute from across the country.

“Trump is trying to block certification of Alaska’s Senate election if the Republican loses,” Sanders wrote, calling it authoritarian conduct and urging supporters to defeat the administration’s political allies. He evidently supports Mary Peltola for Senate, while Murkowski has said she supports Sullivan.

He is also not being truthful. DOJ is seeking a certification delay tied to potentially decisive votes for the other Sullivan, pending an investigation. It is not requesting a blanket prohibition on certification whenever the incumbent loses.

Sanders’ intervention also demonstrates the national political interest in Alaska’s election.

Breaking: DOJ sues Alaska over ‘Decoy Dan,’ seeks certification delay if voter confusion tips Senate race